blueyoda

13 ms·

31.
by blueyoda 4y ago
14? I do recall seeing numbers around 1 per 3000-6000 from several studies (I recall one was from Israel, see: "Israel reports link between rare cases of heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccination in young men"). This means that
32.
by blueyoda 4y ago
> Which other variants would they compare it to? I'd say the responsible thing to do is verify if the risk-benefit ratio actually warranted mandates or not for each new variant that became dominant. By the time Omicron became the do
33.
by blueyoda 4y ago
"Safe and effective" is an ambiguous term that omits the risk-benefit ratio for each individual. It also does not discuss the risk-benefit ratio given the variant. Indeed, the obese, those over 50, and those with prior health cond
34.
by blueyoda 4y ago
> "They knew it was far less likely than complications from COVID" COVID has numerous variants. Which variant are you discussing? Indeed, the first variant was serious. But what of the later variants like Omicron? Virtually all
35.
by blueyoda 4y ago
78% of individuals hospitalized for COVID were obese/overweight. In other words, people who eat too much were primarily responsible for overwhelming our health care system. What are your thoughts on them?
36.
by blueyoda 4y ago
Shadowbanning is a type of censorship. Who defines what is factually incorrect? The lab leak theory was considered "debunked" until recently. Who has the monopoly over what is considered fact and what is considered fiction? I woul
37.
by blueyoda 4y ago
So they didn't know that it caused myocarditis or not - but they deemed it safe for rollout. Shouldn't this have been caught beforehand? How is it ethical to mandate a product whose risks are not even fully known yet? The big issu
38.
by blueyoda 4y ago
If you're comfortable with that, that is fine, I respect everyone's decisions for their own health. But what about those who do not recover? No one has the right to coerce another person to receive an irreversible medical treatm
39.
by blueyoda 4y ago
Straight from Reuters: NEW YORK, April 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has not found a link between heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccines, the agency’s Director Rochelle Walensky said on Tuesday.
40.
by blueyoda 4y ago
Exactly. They censored a Stanford doctor on Twitter just because he had a different opinion, which is incredibly concerning. It's no longer (and never was, in my opinion) about filtering misinformation - it's about controlling the
41.
by blueyoda 4y ago
Natural immunity has been shown to be at least as good if not superior to the vaccine, as shown in peer-reviewed research published in the Lancet. So following science is malicious and selfish? Likewise, "CDC study finds about 78% of
42.
by blueyoda 4y ago
The covid jab is not the only "vaccine" that exists. This is why that term is misleading. It lumps people skeptical about one vaccine into the same category as those who are against all vaccines (which is an absurd position)